Skip to main content

Curated research library of TV news clips regarding the NSA, its oversight and privacy issues, 2009-2014

Click "More / Share / Borrow" for each clip's source context and citation link. HTML5 compatible browser required

Primary curation & research: Robin Chin, Internet Archive TV News Researcher; using TV News Archive service.

Speakers

John Conyers
U.S. Representative, Judiciary Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Conyers Part 1: Every Phone number that they've ever called is already a matter of record. And we skip over whether the collection was a fourth amendment violation. We just say that the access proved in one case or two, that it was very important and that's why we did it this way. I see this as a
John Conyers
U.S. Representative, Judiciary Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Conyers Part 2: A complete failure. we changed the Patriot Act to add relevancy as a standard because of this very same problem that has now been revealed to be existing.
John Conyers
U.S. Representative, Judiciary Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Conyers part 4: And so I feel very uncomfortable about using aggregated meta data on hundreds of millions of Americans, everybody, including every member of Congress and every citizen who has a phone in the united states of America. This is unsustainable. It's outrageous and must be stopped immediately.
John Conyers
U.S. Representative, Judiciary Ranking Member
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Conyers: It's clear to me that we have a very serious violation of the law in which the judiciary committee deliberately put in the issue of relevance and now you're going to help me out and defer to somebody else.
Jim Sensenbrenner
U.S. Representative (R-Wisconsin), Chairman of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Sensenbrenner: I've been the author of the Patriot Act and the Patriot Act reauthorization of 2006. Mr. Conyers, sir was correct in saying why the relevance standard was put in and that was an attempt to limit what the intelligence community could be able to get pursuant to section 215.
Jim Sensenbrenner
U.S. Representative (R-Wisconsin), Chairman of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Sensenbrenner Part 1: It appears to me that according to this letter and according to the testimony of the Feb.. Director Mueller that relevant was an expansion of what could happen rather than a limitation when the law was amended when relevant was not included in that statute. And doesn't that make a mockery of the legal standard because you're trying to have it both ways? Cole: I don't think we're trying have it both ways. Sensenbrenner: well, you sure are because you're saying
Jim Sensenbrenner
U.S. Representative (R-Wisconsin), Chairman of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Sensenbrenner Part 2: authorize, have the court authorize to get us the records of all the phone calls that are made to and from phones in the united states including people who have nothing to do with any type of a terrorist investigation. And then what you're saying is that we'll decide what to pick out of that mass of maybe a billion phone calls a day on what we're looking at rather than saying this person is a target, why don't you get an authorization only for that person's (telephone records?)
Jim Sensenbrenner
U.S. Representative (R-Wisconsin), Chairman of Judiciary Subcommittee on Crime, Terrorism and Homeland Security
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Sensenbrenner: (Let me tell you one who has fought Patriot Act fights usually against the) people over on the other side of the aisle, section 215 expires at the end of 2015 and unless you realize you got a problem, that is not going to be renewed. There are not the votes in the house of representatives to renew section 215 and then you're going to lose the business record access provision of the Patriot Act entirely. It has to be changed and you have to change how you operate section 215 otherwise in a year and a half or two years you're not going to have it anymore
Jerrold Nadler
U.S. Representative, D-New York
CSPAN 07/17/2013
Nadler: The problem obviously with what we're hearing from this panel and what we've heard generally about the relevance standard is that everything in the world is relevant and if we removed that word from the statute, you wouldn't consider or the FISA court wouldn't consider that it would affect your ability to collect meta data in any way whatsoever which is to say you are disregarding the statute entirely.
Jerrold Nadler
U.S. Representative, D-New York
CSPAN 07/17/2013
James Cole: but the collection is only there and only valuable if it is used and the use is severely restricted. Nadler: The abuse of the statute, the abuse of civil liberties, the abuse of privacy is not only misused but miscollection. If you're collecting information about my telephone when you shouldn't be doing that, that is an abuse even if you file that and never use it.
Showing 171 through 180 of 1708